Really. Seriously.
So much so that I'm spamming my own blog.
I need help.
*yawn*
Monday, November 06, 2006
Saturday, November 04, 2006
Graaaaaah!
I think I'm going insane.
My dad is pushing me over the edge. It's my 8th year of school and already I'm failing. My sidetracked tendencies coupled with his "plan for physical fitness" are detrimental to myself, and his screaming at me as "encouragement" isn't helping. My bathroom door handle came out today, probably because I pulled too hard, probably because he was giving me another one of his damned lectures about how I ought not to be watching a good movie, with great plot, good storyline, because it has too much "violence". So what? That doesn't prove anything. A movie can be awesome despite an "R" rating. Many are, even if some aren't. Like V for Vendetta, or Serenity.
He tries to make out that he does what he does for my own good. IMO, I'm not convinced driving me insane is any good for either of us, me or my senile old man. It definitely isn't making anyone any happier, and quite frankly I've been dreaming of rising up against this totalitarian bastard's reign of fear over this house.
I dunno. For the time being, anyway, I can control myself. But I just want to get out of this damn house.
My dad is pushing me over the edge. It's my 8th year of school and already I'm failing. My sidetracked tendencies coupled with his "plan for physical fitness" are detrimental to myself, and his screaming at me as "encouragement" isn't helping. My bathroom door handle came out today, probably because I pulled too hard, probably because he was giving me another one of his damned lectures about how I ought not to be watching a good movie, with great plot, good storyline, because it has too much "violence". So what? That doesn't prove anything. A movie can be awesome despite an "R" rating. Many are, even if some aren't. Like V for Vendetta, or Serenity.
He tries to make out that he does what he does for my own good. IMO, I'm not convinced driving me insane is any good for either of us, me or my senile old man. It definitely isn't making anyone any happier, and quite frankly I've been dreaming of rising up against this totalitarian bastard's reign of fear over this house.
I dunno. For the time being, anyway, I can control myself. But I just want to get out of this damn house.
No, no, no, no.
The MoS? Others? Yes, nice CJ names. Nice locations. Not exactly the most desirable storylines.
I mean, hey, I could use some of those titles. Rhineland, UCLE, Pakkusena, if they weren't all taken (BTW Pepsi, TLR is copyrighted already - it belongs to the good folks at The Lancers Reactor, :O :P). Little Egg sounds kinda cool too. If only it weren't taken already. Graaah! Krug angry! Smash ownership rights! Smash smash smash!
OK that was totally off topic. But while we're at it, Jack Thompson looks like Fred Phelps.
Well, he does have more hair. But still.
Some of the MoS storylines or the characters themselves seem to be plagued by war or conflict... the Rhineland (war with the UN - ???), UCLE (war with the USSR - not unrealistic, but not exactly something you'd expect to be an entry token into the SCJU, which it wasn't), Pakkusena/Kumba (always wonder what's happenin' in that dude's head...).
Meh. Maybe I'm just being paranoid.
Or not. No offense, of course, Pepsi.
I mean, hey, I could use some of those titles. Rhineland, UCLE, Pakkusena, if they weren't all taken (BTW Pepsi, TLR is copyrighted already - it belongs to the good folks at The Lancers Reactor, :O :P). Little Egg sounds kinda cool too. If only it weren't taken already. Graaah! Krug angry! Smash ownership rights! Smash smash smash!
OK that was totally off topic. But while we're at it, Jack Thompson looks like Fred Phelps.
Well, he does have more hair. But still.
Some of the MoS storylines or the characters themselves seem to be plagued by war or conflict... the Rhineland (war with the UN - ???), UCLE (war with the USSR - not unrealistic, but not exactly something you'd expect to be an entry token into the SCJU, which it wasn't), Pakkusena/Kumba (always wonder what's happenin' in that dude's head...).
Meh. Maybe I'm just being paranoid.
Or not. No offense, of course, Pepsi.
Friday, November 03, 2006
Satan Loves Fred Phelps
Found this site recently. 
If there is a Satan, he would most definitely love Fred Phelps.
Don't know who that is? Go to Kansas sometime, and ask anyone about Westboro Baptist. They're a hate group construed of Phelps and his family and friends, who preach God's supposed "message of hate" to "the eternally damned", that is, most everyone, with the exclusion of himself (of course). He and his following go around picketing the funerals of the soldiers of Iraq and Afghanistan shouting at their families that "their sons/fathers are going to hell" (for being "fags", "fag enablers", pedophiles, etc, basically false claims) and post counters on their websites counting the days these people have "been in hell". Westboro is, IMO, a collection of fringe lunatics comparable to Hitler. They hate Muslims, Jews, homosexuals, and even Catholics, whom they classify as "pedophiles who suck the semen out of small children's genitals like vampires". They are totally messed up.
Which leads me to believe that MeansToAnEnd is a follower of Westboro Baptist. OK, not really being serious. Still, he sounds so much like Fred Phelps I can't help laughing. He generalises Muslims as being "terrorists" and is so conservative he isn't even a conservative or a neocon.
Anyway, that was a long rant. Soo...
If there is a Satan, he would most definitely love Fred Phelps.
Don't know who that is? Go to Kansas sometime, and ask anyone about Westboro Baptist. They're a hate group construed of Phelps and his family and friends, who preach God's supposed "message of hate" to "the eternally damned", that is, most everyone, with the exclusion of himself (of course). He and his following go around picketing the funerals of the soldiers of Iraq and Afghanistan shouting at their families that "their sons/fathers are going to hell" (for being "fags", "fag enablers", pedophiles, etc, basically false claims) and post counters on their websites counting the days these people have "been in hell". Westboro is, IMO, a collection of fringe lunatics comparable to Hitler. They hate Muslims, Jews, homosexuals, and even Catholics, whom they classify as "pedophiles who suck the semen out of small children's genitals like vampires". They are totally messed up.
Which leads me to believe that MeansToAnEnd is a follower of Westboro Baptist. OK, not really being serious. Still, he sounds so much like Fred Phelps I can't help laughing. He generalises Muslims as being "terrorists" and is so conservative he isn't even a conservative or a neocon.
Anyway, that was a long rant. Soo...
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
Be Social!
I am. A democratic socialist.
Now that we're over that, I'm going to draft a short essay about that particular system of political belief.
Don't worry folks. I'm always that bored.
-----
Socialists and communists seem to be necessarily thought of among the general American population as being oppressive, authoritarian, and/or generally bad along with their ideaologies. That is not true. Not all social-/communists follow Stalin, Mao, or Jong-Il. These people were not even communists, only assholes who used communism to seize power for their own ends.
In an topic on the Dream of a Ridiculous Dictator forums, ATLANTIS stated that "socialists/communists are fascists". Of course I realise that he was mostly discussing economic policy, but by stating that he attatches more than that to his generalisation. I am not vehemently nationalistic and I do not believe in nationalism nor its enforcement. In fact, if there could be one thing for me that would be patriotic, it would be, for lack of a better term, dissent. I do not believe in shutting people up and in fact I do believe that everyone has the right to voice their opinion. I do not think I am evil, though you may prove me otherwise; as well, I would like to point out that your comparison of fascist and socialist economics is faulty, as there is no complete definition of a "fascist economy"; it is true Mussolini, the original fascist, vied for a controlled economy, but Hitler, who was also recognised as "fascist", did not delve much into economic policy and mostly left enterprise to fend for itself.
But I digress. I am talking about democratic socialism, not fascism.
Generally, socialist economics involves the regulation of private enterprise. This does not, indeed, mean "squash them", but rather requires that they stay up to standard, at least in more mild forms of socialism. Small businesses are fine - ever been to a small-business store or restaurant in San Francisco? They do things the way they were meant to be done. (They sell great food too.) :) Big-ass conglomerates like McDonald's and Wal-Mart sell you cheap shit not because they enjoy doing it, but because they want your money. They dump millions of tons of pollution into the air and water to prove it every day, that they don't care, they just want to make big bucks.
I don't believe that business should be wiped from existence, but I do think that it ought to be kept small and ought to "follow the rules", such as health codes, safety regulations, etc, and that no company or corporation is above the law.
Most socialists/communists generally uphold civil and political rights and toleration; systems such as democratic socialism must uphold the simple right to freedom of speech because any democracy, following a socialist doctrine or not, thrives on the voicing of opinions. If the people cannot do that, then the state ceases to be a democracy and becomes a directorship. Toleration derives from this principle, as if every person's opinion is of equal value then the same must be said for their civil rights, or otherwise the society is not truly free.
And that is what constitutes my political belief: democratic socialism. I hope that I have been clear in my explanation of it, or at least my form of it.
Now that we're over that, I'm going to draft a short essay about that particular system of political belief.
Don't worry folks. I'm always that bored.
-----
Socialists and communists seem to be necessarily thought of among the general American population as being oppressive, authoritarian, and/or generally bad along with their ideaologies. That is not true. Not all social-/communists follow Stalin, Mao, or Jong-Il. These people were not even communists, only assholes who used communism to seize power for their own ends.
In an topic on the Dream of a Ridiculous Dictator forums, ATLANTIS stated that "socialists/communists are fascists". Of course I realise that he was mostly discussing economic policy, but by stating that he attatches more than that to his generalisation. I am not vehemently nationalistic and I do not believe in nationalism nor its enforcement. In fact, if there could be one thing for me that would be patriotic, it would be, for lack of a better term, dissent. I do not believe in shutting people up and in fact I do believe that everyone has the right to voice their opinion. I do not think I am evil, though you may prove me otherwise; as well, I would like to point out that your comparison of fascist and socialist economics is faulty, as there is no complete definition of a "fascist economy"; it is true Mussolini, the original fascist, vied for a controlled economy, but Hitler, who was also recognised as "fascist", did not delve much into economic policy and mostly left enterprise to fend for itself.
But I digress. I am talking about democratic socialism, not fascism.
Generally, socialist economics involves the regulation of private enterprise. This does not, indeed, mean "squash them", but rather requires that they stay up to standard, at least in more mild forms of socialism. Small businesses are fine - ever been to a small-business store or restaurant in San Francisco? They do things the way they were meant to be done. (They sell great food too.) :) Big-ass conglomerates like McDonald's and Wal-Mart sell you cheap shit not because they enjoy doing it, but because they want your money. They dump millions of tons of pollution into the air and water to prove it every day, that they don't care, they just want to make big bucks.
I don't believe that business should be wiped from existence, but I do think that it ought to be kept small and ought to "follow the rules", such as health codes, safety regulations, etc, and that no company or corporation is above the law.
Most socialists/communists generally uphold civil and political rights and toleration; systems such as democratic socialism must uphold the simple right to freedom of speech because any democracy, following a socialist doctrine or not, thrives on the voicing of opinions. If the people cannot do that, then the state ceases to be a democracy and becomes a directorship. Toleration derives from this principle, as if every person's opinion is of equal value then the same must be said for their civil rights, or otherwise the society is not truly free.
And that is what constitutes my political belief: democratic socialism. I hope that I have been clear in my explanation of it, or at least my form of it.
Friday, October 27, 2006
Why I Hate the "War on Terror"
Because it's bullshit. First we jumped into Afghanistan acting on impulse. I understand that the Taliban was assisting Al-Qaeda, which blew up the Twin Towers killing 3000 people, but bringing down the whole country just for two buildings? That's overkill if I ever saw it.
We say every life counts. Must count a lot if every American life is worth 20 Muslim lives, which is what the death toll seems to show.
I don't despise the Americans fighting overseas or Americans in general. They are my fellow countrymen. What's wrong with America is its government, which has led the US and its allies into, for completely ridiculous purposes, a war that has not only bought us the title of "world class laughingstock" but also the deaths of tens of thousands of Muslims who now lay smeared on the streets or tenderized in US concentration camps. And don't get me started on Iraq. It's fucked, and what's worse, we'll never win, either. Terrorism is violence fueled by hate, in this case fundie hate. Terrorists aren't backed by money, not by weapons or regional power, they're backed by viewpoint, and perspective can't be shattered with cluster bombs. Unless we nuke the place, the fundies will still be there.
Besides, we're living in America, land of the free, home of the brave (so the advert says). We ain't living free if we're trying to stamp out other peoples' views, so shut up neocons.
BTW, VG Cats is awesome. I just read the Halloween comic. Totally lovin' it, Scott.
We say every life counts. Must count a lot if every American life is worth 20 Muslim lives, which is what the death toll seems to show.
I don't despise the Americans fighting overseas or Americans in general. They are my fellow countrymen. What's wrong with America is its government, which has led the US and its allies into, for completely ridiculous purposes, a war that has not only bought us the title of "world class laughingstock" but also the deaths of tens of thousands of Muslims who now lay smeared on the streets or tenderized in US concentration camps. And don't get me started on Iraq. It's fucked, and what's worse, we'll never win, either. Terrorism is violence fueled by hate, in this case fundie hate. Terrorists aren't backed by money, not by weapons or regional power, they're backed by viewpoint, and perspective can't be shattered with cluster bombs. Unless we nuke the place, the fundies will still be there.
Besides, we're living in America, land of the free, home of the brave (so the advert says). We ain't living free if we're trying to stamp out other peoples' views, so shut up neocons.
BTW, VG Cats is awesome. I just read the Halloween comic. Totally lovin' it, Scott.
Friday, September 29, 2006
Climate change: We've talked about it, wrote about it - and yet, for us (the US), nothing has been done about it.
Well, that's not entirely true. We did a lot during the Clinton years. (And screw those people who keep talking about that "Clinton-Lewinsky" garbage. He was a better leader, which is more than the current prez can say.) So far, with the Bush administration, we've successfully managed to roll back environmental measures such that companies can dump their waste into our air freely and with no hassle from the government, let alone the EPA - our car companies, for one, have been producing models that waste more gas than the Model T (an old car that didn't get mileage at all compared to ours today. Still, it was an achievement at the time).
The worst part of this is that most people don't believe that this is an issue, let along a political one - or are completely unaware of it. Which is insane, considering that already the ice across the planet - glaciers, snow, the polar caps - is melting, seas are rising worldwide, and a considerable increase recently in the number of hurricanes during hurricane season (there were so many in 2005 that scientists ran out of names for them). That is, until one considers that Bush has been trying as hard as possible to create the illusion that there is no issue.
It is obvious that W. cares little or nothing of humanity, as he has completely dismissed the issue of Katrina - thousands of people dead, and many tens of thousands more homeless. And of course he is ignoring the fact that a disaster looms in the not-too-far future, the flooding of the coastal plains of America. Florida, underwater. Louisiana would be completely irreclaimable. As for the Central US, the Mississippi would overflow, wiping out croplands. The rest of the Heartland, meanwhile, would dry up. Does that sound like an issue to you? It does to me. We must realize that this is an issue, a serious one, one which we will have to tackle in the near future if we are to avoid serious consequences down the road, and for that matter, why shouldn't we start thinking of a solution now? But now comes the big question: How would we go about doing that?
For the near future, the best option we could take would be to start buying into fuel-efficient technology. So far, our country has ranked as one of the most wasteful on the planet, and thusly as the largest polluter. Perhaps if we decided to invest in more hybrids, the skies of LA might turn blue again. Well, perhaps not.
We also need to invest into clean energy - and I mean invest in it, not just slap together a few concept cars and then just drop the whole thing. Serious dollars, serious effort, to help pay for research and development of new power sources and power plants to fuel our unending hunger for energy. Solar power, wind turbines, even nuclear fusion. The results won't come immediately, but with a little cash and perseverance, we might just save our own necks.
Damn, that was a long rant. :P
Well, that's not entirely true. We did a lot during the Clinton years. (And screw those people who keep talking about that "Clinton-Lewinsky" garbage. He was a better leader, which is more than the current prez can say.) So far, with the Bush administration, we've successfully managed to roll back environmental measures such that companies can dump their waste into our air freely and with no hassle from the government, let alone the EPA - our car companies, for one, have been producing models that waste more gas than the Model T (an old car that didn't get mileage at all compared to ours today. Still, it was an achievement at the time).
The worst part of this is that most people don't believe that this is an issue, let along a political one - or are completely unaware of it. Which is insane, considering that already the ice across the planet - glaciers, snow, the polar caps - is melting, seas are rising worldwide, and a considerable increase recently in the number of hurricanes during hurricane season (there were so many in 2005 that scientists ran out of names for them). That is, until one considers that Bush has been trying as hard as possible to create the illusion that there is no issue.
It is obvious that W. cares little or nothing of humanity, as he has completely dismissed the issue of Katrina - thousands of people dead, and many tens of thousands more homeless. And of course he is ignoring the fact that a disaster looms in the not-too-far future, the flooding of the coastal plains of America. Florida, underwater. Louisiana would be completely irreclaimable. As for the Central US, the Mississippi would overflow, wiping out croplands. The rest of the Heartland, meanwhile, would dry up. Does that sound like an issue to you? It does to me. We must realize that this is an issue, a serious one, one which we will have to tackle in the near future if we are to avoid serious consequences down the road, and for that matter, why shouldn't we start thinking of a solution now? But now comes the big question: How would we go about doing that?
For the near future, the best option we could take would be to start buying into fuel-efficient technology. So far, our country has ranked as one of the most wasteful on the planet, and thusly as the largest polluter. Perhaps if we decided to invest in more hybrids, the skies of LA might turn blue again. Well, perhaps not.
We also need to invest into clean energy - and I mean invest in it, not just slap together a few concept cars and then just drop the whole thing. Serious dollars, serious effort, to help pay for research and development of new power sources and power plants to fuel our unending hunger for energy. Solar power, wind turbines, even nuclear fusion. The results won't come immediately, but with a little cash and perseverance, we might just save our own necks.
Damn, that was a long rant. :P
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Startoons
Found these last night while Googling images of Carter (SG-1) (=D). "Startoons" apparently is a Stargate parody. Really... funny. =D Problem is that my school's f'in webfilter screens out "bad words" (i.e. damn, shit, hell, sex - basically anything that would give send those G-rated nutties into shock), so I can't view the page. Idiots. At least it doesn't stop me from direct-linking to the pictures. Enjoy. =D
Our P.E. coach is making us do an essay... just when I have to write 6 poems and finish my geometry homework. Dammit. This sucks.... And we have to do Cornell notes on this stupid thing about "medical preparation". For god's sake, you don' tneed to study a damned book to learn how to excercise! If you have a problem, get a first aid kit or dial 9-1-1, or go to the school nurse! You don't need to read a fekkin' 231-page book to learn how to do push-ups! We take notes and read things when we're studying the liberal arts; you don't read books to learn how to excercise and to learn how to keep people out of trouble. Just tell them: Be strong and be careful! Gad.
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
NationStates
Well, it's a bit of a late announcement (=P), but I have joined NationStates! And with a nation two months in the building... well, um, here it is! =D That's my main nation, anyway.
BTW, in case you were wondering, "Hakeka" is a name I made up. However, I discovered that it was not unique by Googling it - it's the name of an Arabic TV station. LOL!
BTW, in case you were wondering, "Hakeka" is a name I made up. However, I discovered that it was not unique by Googling it - it's the name of an Arabic TV station. LOL!
Blasted coach.
We got a new coach at the pool today. Man, it sucks. He's the "Masters" coach (well, he was). He had us do the stroke everyone hated: backstroke. Now, normally I wouldn't mind that so much, but what got me was that he never told us when we could stop (except perhaps 5 minutes before the end of practice). Seriously, I'd just like to know when we can get a break (which was to say, never).
Also, I haven't heard from Kyle in a while... in dog years, anyway. =D Where the f**k are you, Kyle, damn you! =P
BTW, don't click on the "sucks" link if you're squeamish...
Also, I haven't heard from Kyle in a while... in dog years, anyway. =D Where the f**k are you, Kyle, damn you! =P
BTW, don't click on the "sucks" link if you're squeamish...
Revamping the blog
I edited all the junk posts; didn't need them, anyway. So, how'd y'all like the new look? Good? Great. :P
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
In response...
Since mindsay.com's little "reply" geegaw isn't working for my browser, I thought I'd post my reply to thesonofgray's "Mayday" blog entry here.
Don't flame me.
_______________________________________
"Your first comment, the "we caucasians" thing. I take that as a very racist comment on your part."
That wasn't meant as a racist comment. People say that around here and nobody takes offense.
"Um, and yes. Americans ARE the only ones who live in America...unless you are an illegal immigrant. The name American can apply to anyone anywhere of ANY culture who holds American citizenship."
I meant white Americans, which I had mentioned in that sentence.
""It takes one to know one." Wow. I think I might have used that in like, what, 5th grade? Please. Intelligent discussion."
Watch your mouth. Just because you might have used the phrase in your earlier years doesn't mean that you have to go and take that out on me. And it is in no way childish or unintelligent.
"The MAIN reason I take offense to displaying Mexican flags in illegal immigtion protests is that Mexico should have NOTHING to do with creating/changing US's laws. That right there is an example of infringing on a nation's sovereignty."
Who said that they're using Mexico for this? I was against your saying that just because everyone was holding other nation's flags they ought to be denied citizenship.
"A Mexican illegal immigrant should get the same attention as a Chinese or Italian or Brazilian illegal immigrant."
So you're saying that they should get kicked out of the country and sent back to whatever lives they were aiming to leave behind?
"And, defcon, just step back for a minute, drop all of your biases, and just look at those pictures and tell me what you see. Marching around this nation, carrying another nation's flag, and protesting that your demands be met in this nation is IDIOTIC."
Exactly how is it idiotic?
"And actually, the protest organizers realized their error in the first round of protests. For the May protest they tried their hardest to pass out US flags because they realized, through polling, that the American people didn't really like all of these people, demanding amnesty, waving Mexican flags in protests that shut down roads and filled their tv screens. It was counter-productive."
The general public doesn't really care. I've asked plenty of people; They don't give a hoot what flag is raised, as long as the deal sounds good.
"Defcon, I really think you missed (and by missed I mean completely and utterly did not understand) the point of that blog post. I have nothing against people of different backgrounds. IT IS NOT AN ISSUE."
Thanks, but I would have preferred you removing the little part in parentheses; Again, watch it.
"And it absolutely infuriates me when individuals try and make this about race, culture, liberty, etc. This debate is about economics and security. Our law should NOT be at the will of any group of illegal immigrants, no matter how large their particular ethnic group may be. The US law should protect and serve the citizens of the United States. By addressing the economic and security impact of illegal immigration, the American people will be better off (and possibly former illegal immigrants if the economy demands it)."
The economic and security impact? We put illegal immigrants to work in factories so they can do our dirty work! And they don't really get paid much (although it's probably better than what they'd get in their homelands), so it doesn't make any huge difference to the economy. In fact, if more people were to come into the US, there would be a greater need for US goods, which would actually be helping the economy. On the subject of security, I'd say that there is nothing to worry about. Set aside disasters such as 9-11 (which could have been prevented; The CIA had the intelligence reports), we haven't had terrorist attacks. And, like I said in parentheses, they can be prevented. We will be no more or less better off by shutting illegal immigrants out of the country.
"This might seem like a unipolar view on everything, but, I will repeat, the US ecomony can not accomidate every poor citizen of an economically depressed nation."
Not quite true; Like I said, more people create a greater demand for goods, which helps the economy keep going.
"We can, however, use our resources to help lift the depressed economics of those nations. Just granting amnesty to illegal immigrants will NOT solve the larger issue in Central/South America."
Maybe not, but healing such depressed nations takes money, resources - and time. In addition, one can't expect to gain much in return. Well, at least not initially. (The nation being relieved could become a trade partner or something to that end, although that probably wouldn't happen for a while after the relief efforts.)
And if granting amnesty does not help to relieve the depressed nations, then one could at least stand to grant amnesty to relieve the depressed families.
"And finally, about my 'ignorant teenager' post: I hesitate to included that but I decided to because of a few things. First, I attended high school not too long ago. I know how it is. And I can almost guarantee you that the only reason they skipped school to protest was just that - to skip school. And another observation, they weren't even protesting anything! I witnessed the teenage protests here in Austin when they occured and I watch/read extensive coverage of the protests around the nation. The high school student protest here in Austin were more like a party than a protest. It was just a whole bunch of teenagers who were overjoyed to be out of class and not being punished for it. And just read the newspapers and watch tv! Everytime they interview a student, all they say is something to the effect of "Yeah! Freedom! Um..Se Puede!".
Seriously, I highly doubt their intentions. I was there once, and hell, I would have used any excuse to get out of class, too."
I was pointing out that what you were doing was basically stereotyping. Just because the teenagers are like that in your area doesn't necessarily mean that they all are.
"So there you go, Defcon Pilot. From looking at the trends in your comments directed towards me (like the "I find that you discriminate" comment on ST), I find that you spurt out what you think you know about me, my views and opinions without actually finding out what they are. So please, for the sake of my time and sanity, read everything before you make half-assed conclusions."
I admit that that comment did not necessarily apply; I ought to have edited it. At that moment, I had just read through your blog and I still hadn't gotten my mind off the issue here. But now I don't even remember what the topic was I was commenting on then. I'm good at not remembering... That's why I have to write almost everything down for future reference. :P But again, watch it. I never directly insulted you.
"Thank you for visiting! (Big spinning, hypnotic, flashy smilie {OK, overstatement, I know...})"
You're welcome. Now excuse me while I go into the next room and have a seziure. :P
Don't flame me.
_______________________________________
"Your first comment, the "we caucasians" thing. I take that as a very racist comment on your part."
That wasn't meant as a racist comment. People say that around here and nobody takes offense.
"Um, and yes. Americans ARE the only ones who live in America...unless you are an illegal immigrant. The name American can apply to anyone anywhere of ANY culture who holds American citizenship."
I meant white Americans, which I had mentioned in that sentence.
""It takes one to know one." Wow. I think I might have used that in like, what, 5th grade? Please. Intelligent discussion."
Watch your mouth. Just because you might have used the phrase in your earlier years doesn't mean that you have to go and take that out on me. And it is in no way childish or unintelligent.
"The MAIN reason I take offense to displaying Mexican flags in illegal immigtion protests is that Mexico should have NOTHING to do with creating/changing US's laws. That right there is an example of infringing on a nation's sovereignty."
Who said that they're using Mexico for this? I was against your saying that just because everyone was holding other nation's flags they ought to be denied citizenship.
"A Mexican illegal immigrant should get the same attention as a Chinese or Italian or Brazilian illegal immigrant."
So you're saying that they should get kicked out of the country and sent back to whatever lives they were aiming to leave behind?
"And, defcon, just step back for a minute, drop all of your biases, and just look at those pictures and tell me what you see. Marching around this nation, carrying another nation's flag, and protesting that your demands be met in this nation is IDIOTIC."
Exactly how is it idiotic?
"And actually, the protest organizers realized their error in the first round of protests. For the May protest they tried their hardest to pass out US flags because they realized, through polling, that the American people didn't really like all of these people, demanding amnesty, waving Mexican flags in protests that shut down roads and filled their tv screens. It was counter-productive."
The general public doesn't really care. I've asked plenty of people; They don't give a hoot what flag is raised, as long as the deal sounds good.
"Defcon, I really think you missed (and by missed I mean completely and utterly did not understand) the point of that blog post. I have nothing against people of different backgrounds. IT IS NOT AN ISSUE."
Thanks, but I would have preferred you removing the little part in parentheses; Again, watch it.
"And it absolutely infuriates me when individuals try and make this about race, culture, liberty, etc. This debate is about economics and security. Our law should NOT be at the will of any group of illegal immigrants, no matter how large their particular ethnic group may be. The US law should protect and serve the citizens of the United States. By addressing the economic and security impact of illegal immigration, the American people will be better off (and possibly former illegal immigrants if the economy demands it)."
The economic and security impact? We put illegal immigrants to work in factories so they can do our dirty work! And they don't really get paid much (although it's probably better than what they'd get in their homelands), so it doesn't make any huge difference to the economy. In fact, if more people were to come into the US, there would be a greater need for US goods, which would actually be helping the economy. On the subject of security, I'd say that there is nothing to worry about. Set aside disasters such as 9-11 (which could have been prevented; The CIA had the intelligence reports), we haven't had terrorist attacks. And, like I said in parentheses, they can be prevented. We will be no more or less better off by shutting illegal immigrants out of the country.
"This might seem like a unipolar view on everything, but, I will repeat, the US ecomony can not accomidate every poor citizen of an economically depressed nation."
Not quite true; Like I said, more people create a greater demand for goods, which helps the economy keep going.
"We can, however, use our resources to help lift the depressed economics of those nations. Just granting amnesty to illegal immigrants will NOT solve the larger issue in Central/South America."
Maybe not, but healing such depressed nations takes money, resources - and time. In addition, one can't expect to gain much in return. Well, at least not initially. (The nation being relieved could become a trade partner or something to that end, although that probably wouldn't happen for a while after the relief efforts.)
And if granting amnesty does not help to relieve the depressed nations, then one could at least stand to grant amnesty to relieve the depressed families.
"And finally, about my 'ignorant teenager' post: I hesitate to included that but I decided to because of a few things. First, I attended high school not too long ago. I know how it is. And I can almost guarantee you that the only reason they skipped school to protest was just that - to skip school. And another observation, they weren't even protesting anything! I witnessed the teenage protests here in Austin when they occured and I watch/read extensive coverage of the protests around the nation. The high school student protest here in Austin were more like a party than a protest. It was just a whole bunch of teenagers who were overjoyed to be out of class and not being punished for it. And just read the newspapers and watch tv! Everytime they interview a student, all they say is something to the effect of "Yeah! Freedom! Um..Se Puede!".
Seriously, I highly doubt their intentions. I was there once, and hell, I would have used any excuse to get out of class, too."
I was pointing out that what you were doing was basically stereotyping. Just because the teenagers are like that in your area doesn't necessarily mean that they all are.
"So there you go, Defcon Pilot. From looking at the trends in your comments directed towards me (like the "I find that you discriminate" comment on ST), I find that you spurt out what you think you know about me, my views and opinions without actually finding out what they are. So please, for the sake of my time and sanity, read everything before you make half-assed conclusions."
I admit that that comment did not necessarily apply; I ought to have edited it. At that moment, I had just read through your blog and I still hadn't gotten my mind off the issue here. But now I don't even remember what the topic was I was commenting on then. I'm good at not remembering... That's why I have to write almost everything down for future reference. :P But again, watch it. I never directly insulted you.
"Thank you for visiting! (Big spinning, hypnotic, flashy smilie {OK, overstatement, I know...})"
You're welcome. Now excuse me while I go into the next room and have a seziure. :P
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
